San Diego  More than a year after criminal charges against six former members of the San Diego pension board were dropped, a court battle has started over the $5.4 million in legal fees owed to the defendants’ attorneys in the case.

The dispute turns on how the courts will interpret an unusual 2002 resolution the City Council approved. It promised that the city would indemnify pension board members who might be sued over their support of a plan that allowed the city to put less money into the pension system than required.

The lawyers who defended the six former members contend the resolution means the city should pay their attorney fees.

But lawyers with the City Attorney’s Office say the resolution was intended only to cover legal costs for civil lawsuits — not criminal charges. They say the city has no obligation under state law or the city resolution to pay for the legal defense in the criminal case.

After the city rejected their claim for payment, the six former board members — Cathy Lexin, Ronald Saathoff, John Torres, Mary Vattimo, Teresa Webster and Sharon Wilkinson — filed a lawsuit in San Diego Superior Court.

Judge William Dato issued the first ruling in the case on May 13. He rejected the city’s bid to dismiss the suit on several grounds, saying the city’s argument that the resolution covered only “claims” and “lawsuits” was too narrow.

Dato also said that the city contends the “genesis and history” of the resolution shows that it was intended only to apply to civil lawsuits, and that comments from a 2002 retirement board hearing where the resolution was discussed show that is true.

The judge said there is not yet any proof that those comments were communicated to the City Council, which passed the crucial resolution.

Gina Coburn, a spokeswoman for the City Attorney’s Office, said that Dato’s ruling comes very early in the case over the disputed legal fees, before any evidence has been developed or submitted, and at a point when the judge has to assume the allegations made in the lawsuit are true.

“We expect to provide factual evidence when we get to that stage of the case,” Coburn said in an email response when asked about the ruling.